Keep hudud out of general election

Kuala Selangor MP Dzulkefly Ahmad said this needs to be done so that election campaigns can be concentrated on the 'real' issues.

PETALING JAYA: The hudud issue should not be given preference in the general election as there are more pressing matters.

According to Kuala Selangor MP Dzulkefly Ahmad, this ought to be done to ensure that real political issues such as policies, leadership, national debt, cost of living and corruption would not be overshadowed by debates on hudud.

Dzulkefly Ahmad, who is also the PAS Research Centre director, said : “Hudud is being played up by Umno so that DAP-PAS relations is strained.

“The Chinese voters will be instilled with fear. On that trajectory, the real election issues will be lost.”

The call to stop using hudud as a general election issue came following Bachok MP, Nasharuddin Mat Isa’s accusation that national DAP chairman Karpal Singh is an enemy of Islam, which prompted Karpal to file a suit against Nasharuddin.

After that, PAS Youth chief Nasruddin Hasan Tantawi called upon the DAP to advise Karpal not to rock the boat within Pakatan Rakyat coalition which is made up of PKR, PAS and DAP.

He also suggested that a forum be hosted to educate the public on hudud.

“People of all faiths must be involved in the forum so that they are made aware of their rights and responsibility although hudud law is for Muslims only.

“Only then sanity will prevail,” said Dzulkefly.

Defending the implementation of hudud, he said that hudud is only part of syariah, which is mentioned in the Quran.

“Hudud is only for hardcore criminals,” he said.

Circumstantial evidence

Hudud is the Islamic penal law, qisas is the laws of retribution and takzir is equivalent to civil law.

Crimes under hudud and the punishment are mentioned in the Quran. Under takzir, the crimes are mentioned in the Quran but the punishment is determined by court whereas under qisas the penalty is decided by the victim’s family where forgiveness is emphasised.

Elaborating on this point, the first-term MP gave an example on the offence of adultery.

“If only one or two people witnessed someone committing adultery, hudud cannot be enforced. It does not mean they are innocent and they will be charged via takzir where circumstantial evidence would be taken into account,” said Dzulkefly.

On another note, he also responded to the point raised by Islamic Renaissance Front director, AhmadFarouk Musa, who said the implementation of hudud is subject to human error and fallibility and can always be challenged and questioned.

“God is not here to adjudicate. Man in the name of a judge can preside a case,” he said, adding that while syariah law cannot be contested, interpretation of the various schools of jurisprudence can still be debated.

Comments

Readers are required to have a valid Facebook account to comment on this story. We welcome your opinions to allow a healthy debate. We want our readers to be responsible while commenting and to consider how their views could be received by others. Please be polite and do not use swear words or crude or sexual language or defamatory words. FMT also holds the right to remove comments that violate the letter or spirit of the general commenting rules.

The views expressed in the contents are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of FMT.